Here's the problem. This game is not designed for match play. Games are too long. Which leads to the issues that the Decipher card game had with odd number of rounds. Which leads to odd results, especially if there is a bit of an unbalance in between the factions. And then there are the issues people have if they get to play their "stronger" squad more often than another player's.

Is screwing up the tournament scoring worth it for the "theme"? FFG has their answer. What you want to do is fine, but it isn't good for the broader tournament scene.

The broader tournament scene which you believe to be inherently broken?

Surely changing it cant make it any more 'not designed for match play'. You still have imbalances with lists what you dont get is unthematic games.

Consider no one has to my knowledge tried a 'bring two lists' event its a little premature to claim it would 'screw up the scene'.

I dont see how a tournament where by sheer random chance every game ends up being reb vs imp would be any different from one where the thematic clash of red vs imp was built into the mechanics.

Or is the game only balanced when you play with identical forces? If thats the case time for a serious overhaul i'd imagine as they points system clearly isnt working.

If you're claming you can't make a mirror match feel thematic I think you're selling yourself short on the creativity front.

The broader tournament scene which you believe to be inherently broken?

Surely changing it cant make it any more 'not designed for match play'. You still have imbalances with lists what you dont get is unthematic games.

Consider no one has to my knowledge tried a 'bring two lists' event its a little premature to claim it would 'screw up the scene'.

I dont see how a tournament where by sheer random chance every game ends up being reb vs imp would be any different from one where the thematic clash of red vs imp was built into the mechanics.

Or is the game only balanced when you play with identical forces? If thats the case time for a serious overhaul i'd imagine as they points system clearly isnt working.

Do you know what match play is? It's where each opponent plays their 2 decks against each other in a round. It works for those games, because they are limited to each side. And I have plenty of experience with a system that required 2 decks, but only one game per round, with you alternating decks in each pair of matchups. It was a mess to keep track off. I think requiring 2 games against the same opponent is a bit much.

Which brings up another point, how do you determine which squad you use? Especially since this game won't be split in Light and Dark like SWCCG and SWLCG are. You can't just determine which side you will play, because there will be an uneven split. So you are left to determining when the players meet. And since you can't really enforce the playing of both squads equally, some will be able to play one squad more than the other. In fact, I can see some not even using their second squad.

As for the balance of the current meta, I don't think it is broken. But look at it from those that truly believe the RPS scenario we are in. Phantoms<Fat Falcons<TIE Swarms. What does your proposed tournament format do to this triad of "viable" squads. Balance against certain squads can be found in the same faction. B-wings tossed out the main double Falcon dominance we had during Wave 2 (sure, swarms were still an option, but the combined usage of B-wings made double Falcons less popular).

For a small local tournament, your idea is fine. But to apply it to the greater tournament circuit is misguided. There are too many factors that break it compared to what we have now.

While that might be an okay gimmick for the occaisional event, I would find it annoying were it to become the standard. I don't want to be forced to switch lists during a tournament.

Would need to have every player bring a list for each faction, and randomly select which list they'd play each round.

Would need to have every player bring a list for each faction, and randomly select which list they'd play each round.

Which will lead to one squad being played more than other. And if the player isn't playing the squad he is most comfortable with, he sort of gets screwed.

Mirror matches double the amount of match ups you can face. They are a good thing to competitive play.

If you're claming you can't make a mirror match feel thematic I think you're selling yourself short on the creativity front.

"It's a Rebel/Imperial training exercise.".

Job done.

The broader tournament scene which you believe to be inherently broken?

Surely changing it cant make it any more 'not designed for match play'. You still have imbalances with lists what you dont get is unthematic games.

Consider no one has to my knowledge tried a 'bring two lists' event its a little premature to claim it would 'screw up the scene'.

I dont see how a tournament where by sheer random chance every game ends up being reb vs imp would be any different from one where the thematic clash of red vs imp was built into the mechanics.

Or is the game only balanced when you play with identical forces? If thats the case time for a serious overhaul i'd imagine as they points system clearly isnt working.

Do you know what match play is?

Erm yes, probably more than most people on this board. Im just not going to mention my old job as im explained what i used to do a million times already but lets just say it was organsing *very* big match play events for the worlds largest wargames company.

Im not picking ideas out of thin air here

Personally I hate the idea of forcing players to build two lists.
I personally only play rebels because they are my preferred faction and indeed only own one imperial ship.
Similarly at my local shop there are quite a few people who either only own one faction or only play one faction!
While the idea seems like a solid thing to run by a local gaming group it's hardly something that needs to be addressed on a larger scale.

If you have a group that wants to do this then do it!
Just don't force it into the rule books and make players either spend extra money in order to play at all or run lists or factions they're uncomfortable with.

I know I'd feel the impact of both negatives to this idea.
I don't have the extra disposable income required to buy into imperials and even if I did I wouldn't want to fly them, doing so would seriously impact how fun I perceive the game to be.

What was wrong with the idea of a First Place for each faction?

Why does there have to be an "overall" champion?

Getting away from that format and seeing more interesting builds with a chance to be competitive is my intent!

Personally I hate the idea of forcing players to build two lists.

I personally only play rebels because they are my preferred faction and indeed only own one imperial ship.

Similarly at my local shop there are quite a few people who either only own one faction or only play one faction!

While the idea seems like a solid thing to run by a local gaming group it's hardly something that needs to be addressed on a larger scale.

If you have a group that wants to do this then do it!

Just don't force it into the rule books and make players either spend extra money in order to play at all or run lists or factions they're uncomfortable with.

I know I'd feel the impact of both negatives to this idea.

I don't have the extra disposable income required to buy into imperials and even if I did I wouldn't want to fly them, doing so would seriously impact how fun I perceive the game to be.

I'm sensing a whiff of equivocation fallacy / false dichotomy in a lot of the negative posts

(although I quoted you twiz, I'm not necessarily pointing the finger at you here)

No-one is suggesting that the current competition format is irrevocably changed to force players to field lists for more than one faction - it's more a case that we are suggesting that the competition scene is expanded to offer more varied formats than it currently offers.

I'd give it a shot. Not because I find mirror faction matches immersion-shattering blasphemies, but because I like variety, and I think everyone benefits when we create new experiences for people.

However, I don't feel we need to get/encourage/force wide spread adoption. I think we (those that are interested to try it) should just do it and let other people judge the tournament it's own merits/the fun they have.

First, let me say that I like the idea as proposed.

I am, however, concerned that you will alienate a certain segment of the player population that chooses only to collect one faction. Right or wrong, this does occur.

And it is never good to alienate a segment of the player pool, as it has long term adverse affects for the game. I have seen it happen many times.

I understand your position is that they just can't participate in organized play (or at least in your version of organized play), but it doesn't prevent them from casual play, or existing format tournaments.

But that is the point. It will force them to either choose to collect another faction, or not be able to play. This will result in bad/hard feelings, and as I said above, adverse affects. Not a good thing. And not something a company like FFG would want to support - as it goes against their very business model - of selling deep and wide.

First, let me say that I like the idea as proposed.

I am, however, concerned that you will alienate a certain segment of the player population that chooses only to collect one faction. Right or wrong, this does occur.

....

A new tournament format isn't about alienating players, it's about offering a different playing experience. If someone is alienated by other people having fun differently, well, I'd suggest there's a deeper problem there that has nothing to do with X-Wing.

Exactly this.

At the risk of 'uncle alberting'. We used to run GTs for GW core games.. lot of players fed up with blood angel vs blood angel (or whichever the 'power codex' was at the time) mirror matches. At one point you were mental not to take five man squads of marines in razorbacks with plasma guns.. it was most cost effective.

But we did equal ticket number campaign weekends where you chose to play as 'imperium' or 'chaos' (or orks, or eldar/tau alliance...whatever the opposition was.. always had to be one side imperial though as that was 70 per cent of the 40k player base).

Campaign weekends sold out really quickly, every one loved them.

We didnt stop running GTS though... it was just a different weekend organised play format.

When i left GW stopped doing campaigns as it was more effort but thankfully the 'Gaming Club Network' in the Uk took up the mantle and carried on running them in warhammer world with GW support.

You can still google up pdfs of the rules packs, have a look you'll see its the same 'game' its just got more theme and narrative behind it. Its still competetive but as you were fighting as a 'team' for a good guy or bad guy win people were less het up about a single loss as it averaged out to be less important as you played as a 'task force' of eight or so armies who would have 'thematically' banded together.

Im not saying change the mirror match possible tournaments, im saying give those of us who find that immersion destroying an alternative with equal kudos. No one would force you to play a 'two faction bring and battle' but it would be nice to have the choice to do so.

What is stopping you then? Because it is an alternate format, it is never going to be the premier format.

First, let me say that I like the idea as proposed.

I am, however, concerned that you will alienate a certain segment of the player population that chooses only to collect one faction. Right or wrong, this does occur.

...

A new tournament format isn't about alienating players, it's about offering a different playing experience. If someone is alienated by other people having fun differently, well, I'd suggest there's a deeper problem there that has nothing to do with X-Wing.

Forgive me, as I don't think I stated my point well, and as a result you misunderstood.

What I was trying to get across was the fact that any form of organized play should offer the opportunity for anyone to play who already owns the game. By creating a version of organized play that specifically requires you to own a certain portion of the game (an expansion, or whatever), needlessly limits the player pool. I just don't think this decision would be in the best interest of an FFG officially sponsored tournament.

For example, it would make no sense for them to have a World Championship with the rule stating that you must field a TIE Advanced (or whatever). They want these tournaments to be inclusive, not exclusive.

What a store does on its own, or what you as a group of gamers do on there own, is certainly fine.

What is stopping you then? Because it is an alternate format, it is never going to be the premier format.

Stopping me personally.... sheer lack of time.

Too many interests too little time. Im in a signed band and have to do gigs, i run two historical re-enactment groups, i organise and put on re-enactment battles and airsoft events, i've got two tabletop RPG groups and when i've got the time i edit a magazine for a job... I just dont have the time (and after five years of doing it for gw) the inclination to organise events.

I'd play in one if someone else did.

The curse of organising things you'd like to play in is that you cant!

I'd have loved to have played in a GW campaign weekend but when you're running it its a bit tricky.

First, let me say that I like the idea as proposed.

I am, however, concerned that you will alienate a certain segment of the player population that chooses only to collect one faction. Right or wrong, this does occur.

...

A new tournament format isn't about alienating players, it's about offering a different playing experience. If someone is alienated by other people having fun differently, well, I'd suggest there's a deeper problem there that has nothing to do with X-Wing.

Forgive me, as I don't think I stated my point well, and as a result you misunderstood.

What I was trying to get across was the fact that any form of organized play should offer the opportunity for anyone to play who already owns the game. By creating a version of organized play that specifically requires you to own a certain portion of the game (an expansion, or whatever), needlessly limits the player pool. I just don't think this decision would be in the best interest of an FFG officially sponsored tournament.

For example, it would make no sense for them to have a World Championship with the rule stating that you must field a TIE Advanced (or whatever). They want these tournaments to be inclusive, not exclusive.

What a store does on its own, or what you as a group of gamers do on there own, is certainly fine.

I see your point but no form of organised play allows you to play with 'just the game'. Unless you had 30 point tournaments.

The nature of the game requires add on purchases.

In the same way that some people want to run OT trilogy ships only events you can understand why some people would want to test their skills in a more thematic way.

If i use my previous example of campaign events i used to organise then you can do it your way *and* mine by having players sign up as 'task forces' or fleets. Play games where an imperial fleet challenges a rebel fleet and play as teams.

You occasionally get odd numbers but we got around that by having a 'patrol force' of half your normal points value. In rare occasions to make an even event you'd combine your 'patrol force' with another of your faction and the two of you would play one whole force of the other faction. Not ideal but the only real way you can get around having an uneven number of players if someone drops out due to illness or their car breaks down on the way there and you've no stand in players.

But putting the 100pt squad requirement is already a restriction against people that own less than 100pts worth of ships. In effect you alienate people that haven't bought 'enough' X Wing to play.

Why is that restriction okay but alternate format restrictions not?

I get your point, I just don't feel it has any bearing given the proposal is to run an alternate tournament format in parallel with the current format, and not replace the current format.

Of topic but I'd also like to see 120 and 150 point tournaments. It be fun flying larger fleets

But putting the 100pt squad requirement is already a restriction against people that own less than 100pts worth of ships. In effect you alienate people that haven't bought 'enough' X Wing to play.

Why is that restriction okay but alternate format restrictions not?

I get your point, I just don't feel it has any bearing given the proposal is to run an alternate tournament format in parallel with the current format, and not replace the current format.

Of topic but I'd also like to see 120 and 150 point tournaments. It be fun flying larger fleets

Now that you've brought up more points, that's another item I'd like to see more of as well!!!

I dont see how a tournament where by sheer random chance every game ends up being reb vs imp would be any different from one where the thematic clash of red vs imp was built into the mechanics.

Because if it's by sheer random chance then players don't know ahead of time that they'll only be fighting the mirror faction.

Building it into the mechanics guarantees you won't fight lists of the other faction and injects a whole load of complex considerations into the metagame where people try to game the mechanics that prevent mirrors.

FFG allows mirrors because it makes everything simpler, you only need one squad and it makes X-wing more about the game the metagame.

But putting the 100pt squad requirement is already a restriction against people that own less than 100pts worth of ships. In effect you alienate people that haven't bought 'enough' X Wing to play.

Is this serious ?

100 pt is standard, default, normalized or however you want to call it. Anything else is a deviation from the norm. Which can be perfectly fine, but that's something that he already pointed out, so there is absolutely no need to repeat it, except that it is truth that the way you would alienate the most people, is by taking a deviation from the norm

Mirrors doesn't make the game "simpler". It is a simple way to add DEPTH to the competitive play. Actually i wouldn't attend to a tournament which guarantees no mirror match ups, i would find it boring to tailor the list for only empire vs rebel match ups.

And like is say .. .. its so easy to fix.

The core rules tell you to each play one of the sides in the galactic civil war but oddly this is suspended for organised play?

If you had to take two lists to an event it would cost hardly anything more for most people.

Most people i know intend to play one faction, end up getting everything.

I really like this point especially since part of the strategy of the game is to build your Squadron to counter possible opponents squads, and I hate having to worry about a fat Han and a tie swarm. it is more interesting for me to be like what Ships might the rebal player field that i might have to react to? Biggs, Ethan, Lt. Blount ect. and not have to worry about other imperials or vica versa. I really think that mirror matches take away from the game as a whole.